If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

BPA vs Need

Why does it always come down to the discussion of BPA vs Need? Why cant it be both?

Why can't it be picking BPA at a position of need?

If your stuck with pick 19 and have holes in more then 3-4 areas that you could not fill with FA then its dangerous to pick BPA. This is what has gotten us in trouble over the last couple of years leaving us with huge holes coming into the season.

First it was Ireland completely negecting the CB's one season then completely neglecting the OL this last season.... BPA at a position of need wil gaurantee your filling holes.
Chubbs

In psychology, Stockholm Syndrome is an apparently paradoxical psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and have positive feelings towards their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them. "[6]

It just depends. When Miami drafts at 19, it's likely that Robinson, Matthews, and Lewan will be off the board.

After them, you have Tiny Richardson (who I like, but probably not enough to draft there), Kouandjio (who I would not draft there), and Martin (who I view as a good 2nd RD prospect). I wouldn't pass on superior players to draft BPA at a position that's been thinned out.

Looking at the CB's, you could have Gilbert, Dennard, or both sitting there. Keeping in mind that we drafted two CB's last season and that it's rare for CB's to play at a high level (regardless of draft position) in year 1, that person better be a legitimate BPA candidate. Given that we don't play a lot of press, Gilbert would make more sense than Dennard for Miami - I think.

Jimmie Ward makes a lot sense to me. I think he can be a true single-high safety, because he takes great angles, has great quickness, and adequate speed. He also has outstanding ball skills and can come down to cover the slot. It'd allow Jones to play more in the box - which is where he excels. Don't know if it'd fit with Coyle's approach - seems to like a lot of 2-deep safety. Said it before, but I see a lot of Earl Thomas to his game (again, not that he'll be THAT good).

Jeremy Hill is the other guy I'm really eyeing at 19. I can see Lazor loving his feet and burst.

You also have to take into account the rest of the board. After the top 3 OT's there's a drop off, and then there's a group of guys packed pretty close together (imo). I'd expect some of them to be available in the 2nd. I don't see other guys in the draft with skill sets like Hill or Ward.

It comes down to philosophy vs. situation. If you need an O lineman and, at your pick, the BPA is an O lineman...perfect. What if you need a tackle and what is left is a tackle who is probably a second rounder any other year, with the BPA a safety or TE? We could use an upgrade at both TE and S, so do you still take the 2nd rd tackle?

It just depends. When Miami drafts at 19, it's likely that Robinson, Matthews, and Lewan will be off the board.

After them, you have Tiny Richardson (who I like, but probably not enough to draft there), Kouandjio (who I would not draft there), and Martin (who I view as a good 2nd RD prospect). I wouldn't pass on superior players to draft BPA at a position that's been thinned out.

Looking at the CB's, you could have Gilbert, Dennard, or both sitting there. Keeping in mind that we drafted two CB's last season and that it's rare for CB's to play at a high level (regardless of draft position) in year 1, that person better be a legitimate BPA candidate. Given that we don't play a lot of press, Gilbert would make more sense than Dennard for Miami - I think.

Jimmie Ward makes a lot sense to me. I think he can be a true single-high safety, because he takes great angles, has great quickness, and adequate speed. He also has outstanding ball skills and can come down to cover the slot. It'd allow Jones to play more in the box - which is where he excels. Don't know if it'd fit with Coyle's approach - seems to like a lot of 2-deep safety. Said it before, but I see a lot of Earl Thomas to his game (again, not that he'll be THAT good).

Jeremy Hill is the other guy I'm really eyeing at 19. I can see Lazor loving his feet and burst.

You also have to take into account the rest of the board. After the top 3 OT's there's a drop off, and then there's a group of guys packed pretty close together (imo). I'd expect some of them to be available in the 2nd. I don't see other guys in the draft with skill sets like Hill or Ward.

Martin is a top 20 prospect, Richardson id late first early second. Jeremy Hill is a late second to a late third. there is a good chance if they want him all you need is to use your third or reach in the second. Martin is the #4 tackle in the draft or the best or second best guard depending on where you plan on putting him.

Why does it always come down to the discussion of BPA vs Need? Why cant it be both?

Why can't it be picking BPA at a position of need?

If your stuck with pick 19 and have holes in more then 3-4 areas that you could not fill with FA then its dangerous to pick BPA. This is what has gotten us in trouble over the last couple of years leaving us with huge holes coming into the season.

First it was Ireland completely negecting the CB's one season then completely neglecting the OL this last season.... BPA at a position of need wil gaurantee your filling holes.
Chubbs

BPA makes no sense to me when you have needs. Look at last year, we got the top pass rusher and a great player but he cant get on the field with other guys already slotted there. You can get your top WR and put him in the 4th receiver spot. You can get the top TE and he only see the feild when clay needs a rest or they go in a jumbo package. Or you can Get the best OL guy and he plays every offensive snap of every game. Its a no brainer to me that you draft by need.

I get BPA when your Oakland or Jacksonville because they have so many needs anyway that the best player available is most likely a need.

If you're drafting for need then of course you're going to draft the bpa at that position. Normally I'd prefer bpa, within reason, ie if you're stacked at a position and the bpa at the time of your pick is a player at that position, there's some redundancy there. But this year the need at OL is overwhelming, I'd lean that way. It also depends on what happens in free agency, how many holes are filled. The money spent on Wheeler and Ellerbe last year in fa was a disgrace, I'd so much rather have that cash plowed into the OL.

Nothing wrong with taking BPA. You just up the ante on need later when you do that.

So say we go Ebron at 19. Now the entire world knows you are absolutely going to draft an Oline next and after that. (unless we get 3 in FA which I think is totally unnecessary.

But then you have Sef-Jenkins who I think could be the next Graham and you could trade down and still get him and then have more ammo to get your Oline. Its also about value and depth at position. There are also other good big TE who will be around rds. 2-4 so there are many routes you can go.

If no depth at position and drop off is significant, then you may be asing for trouble on need. You cannot have the jimmy Johnson attitude that late rounders will be fine for OL. There is clear talent that sets a 1st rounder to later rounds at OL.

Martin is a top 20 prospect, Richardson id late first early second. Jeremy Hill is a late second to a late third. there is a good chance if they want him all you need is to use your third or reach in the second. Martin is the #4 tackle in the draft or the best or second best guard depending on where you plan on putting him.